RE: Josephus and other contemporaries on Jesus
July 5, 2018 at 11:28 pm
(This post was last modified: July 5, 2018 at 11:30 pm by JairCrawford.)
(July 5, 2018 at 10:17 pm)Succubus Wrote:(July 5, 2018 at 8:40 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: Here's one: Bart Ehrman.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_Jesus_...F_(Ehrman)
He's a New Testament scholar, but also an open agnostic, and even he points out that the Jesus myth hypothesis is not seriously considered by historians or experts in the field at all. And once again, he's extremely well-versed in this area (and has written 25 books on the New Testament, including three college textbooks) and, as someone who doesn't believe (he admits that the more he looked into the Bible, the less he believed; admittedly, it's the problem of evil that pushed him into nonbelief), has enough distance that he can actually examine the evidence without trying to force the ideas he already holds into it.
So, if someone with these credentials says he probably did exist (even if the Gospels ended up embellished to the point where the real person becomes a myth, which he does point out throughout his books), I'm inclined to believe him.
Yeah. They did give us Bart Eharman. Uh, that's true. Yeah.Yeah well, alright, I take your point. But apart from Bart fackin Ermin what have the fackin agnostics historians ever done for us eh?
There is some debate as to why the millionaire author of 25 best selling books would say such a thing.
Quote:Bart Eheram states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontious Pilate is the most certain element about him
And this, from the author of the superb; Deconstructing Jesus?
Mu$ht be $home mi$htake.
I wouldn't assume it's about the money. Trust me I've read some of his blogs and the overwhelming majority of Christians would hate his views on Jesus, so I don't think he's trying to sell out to apologetics at all. I myself don't agree with his conclusions on a great many things.
I believe he is arguing from the issue of embarrassment. That Jesus was crucified falls under this category, which could give its historical probability a bump.
As for his views on the TF, I'll have to do some more reading on that. I'm curious to see his argument for an authentic Josephan kernel.